For me, it's the Arctic Monkeys. Not a single thing original or interesting about them, and nothing that was done better than any bands that came before them with the same sort of late 70s revival sound. just another NME/ UK media circus with only the most superficial levels of merit. After The Strokes and Franz Ferdinand (both of whom are superior the arctic monkeys imo) I can't believe that same sound was being hyped as genius for the third time in 5 years.

What about you...remember to keep this civil. Attack bands, not posters...and try to give reasons.

I posted something similar last year under the pseudonymn Alex M (when I still harboured parent-taught insecurities about using my first name on the internet for anything other than Facebook ) about Radiohead. I am pleased to report that my Radiohead discovery is coming along nicely: I'm ready to say that I actually like OK Computer as an album, and would maybe place The Bends around my top 200. Time to move onto Kid A and In Rainbows, which I'm less hopeful for. But then a year ago, I couldn't stand the lot.

Ironically Jonathon, you've picked the only band I have ever worshipped, the band which first got me completely wrapped up in music. So I'll do my best to explain it from my side.

Firstly, although this is the only high rating I've ever agreed with NME on, it's important to remember that the band themselves, as Alex Turner so quaintly states at the start of the I Bet You Look Good on the Dancefloor video, didn't believe the hype, and wished it would all go away. In fact, it was as a direct result of the British press wetting themselves that American critics were prepared to discard Arctic Monkeys as just another over-hyped Beatles contender without having heard their music.

Secondly, if you go down the dangerous path of saying that Arctic Monkeys are The Strokes Mark 3, you'll end up saying that all cutely structured guitar rock is The Sex Beatles phenomenon which Oasis falsely tried to live up to. The way I see it, being a massive fan of each of three bands you've mentioned, is that far from being cheap imitators of their influences (it's important to note that while Arctic Monkeys are big followers of The Strokes, Franz Ferdinand have never remotely influenced them musically), they have taken 21st century post-punk to a new level. Julian Casablancas was and still is a neat songwriter with a die hard image to keep up. Alex Kapranos is an art rock fan who'd been around the block a few times before forming Franz Ferdinand, whose music is a studied take on mainstream dance-punk. Alex Turner is a genius - until last year's art-for-art's-sake effort, all the image was in the music. Or it would have been if the NME weren't so eager to replace The Beatles.

Here's my view, after about 500 listens to every one of the albums relevant, from pretty sheltered middle-class Northern England: The Strokes were happy-go-lucky pretenders in The Ramones' shadow who happened to stumble upon a guitar sound which, along with their punk ethic, carried them to the heights of Is This It. Franz Ferdinand are actually a pretty mediocre act, who are at their best silly romancers (Take Me Out, Tell Her Tonight, Do You Want To) so hook-driven that they're brilliant and at their worst (with the exception of The Fallen, one of my favourites of theirs) calculated in their use of edgy subject matters (Michael). Arctic Monkeys force their narratives and wit upon you with such explosive conviction and instrumental star turn which can only come from youthful naivety, whether it's satirising Steel City drudgery, winding through sometimes wayward desert sound, or covering up a guitar album made just for the hell of it, that it took me a while but I got hooked. Also, none of it would work unless Alex Turner, whose father was a music teacher, was an accomplished melodist. If you don't believe me just listen to The Last Shadow Puppets album, more specifically My Mistakes Were Made for You.

That's my opinion. I suppose Arctic Monkeys, apart from vague indie rock fans, do appeal to a certain type of music-lover, so I can understand you not liking them.

Klaxons. They won the Mercury Music Prize for a mediocreish album. Jesus Christ, in my school they inspired a new way of dressing and of speaking. They called it Nu-Rave. AHH!

I remember, the glowsticks. We should thank them for putting that idea into the head of Will.i.am

And what about Speeche Debelle last year? Talk about a sad excuse to not give Bat For Lashes her long deserving mercury prize (even florence and la roux deserved more than Debelle)

Sorry Jonathon, I don't get it. You've been bashing before the likes of Arctic Monkeys and Amy Winehouse. Then the next thing I see you doing is including those very same artists in your personal favorite albums list of the '00s, like you did earlier this year. ?????

well if you're talking singer songwriter most of the male songwriters I just don't get like the Buckley's, Nick Drake, Bon Ivar, Van Morrison but most of all Tom Waits. What's with that voice? Sounds like Kermit the frog with a frog in his throat. On the women's side Joanna Newsom and Exile era Liz Phair. The album is ok but I just don't get the whole "she went downhill from here on out" when I thought she made much better records. I don't get Pavement. But my problem is people who say they don't like Pavement usually say they also don't like the Pixies or Sonic Youth. Pixies and Sonic Youth are incredible and of course influencial and don't deserve to be clumped next to a band that ripped both of them off.
I agree with what someone said about that Speech Deballe lady who took the Mercury Prize instead of Bat for Lashes. The Mercury Prize people just wanted to shake things up because they knew Bat for Lashes was a shoe in and everyone knew it. They've been know to do that from time to time which is why Radiohead has never took home the big Prize.

You mentioned some of the many performers that I just don't get yet, including: the Pixies, Sonic Youth, Pavement, Tom Waits, Liz Phair. On the other hand, I do appreciate and enjoy the Buckleys and Van Morrison.

Other performers that have yet to gel for me, but rate very high among other AMers include: Beastie Boys, Public Enemy, Velvet Underground, Bjork, Beck, Talking Heads, Byrds, Sex Pistols, Kraftwerk, Joy Division, Ramones, PJ Harvey, The Stooges, Brian Eno, Nick Cave, Captain Beefheart, Primal Scream, Pulp, T. Rex, Run DMC and Portishead.

For some of these performers, I can appreciate their talent, but don't care to listen to their songs (e.g., Beastie Boys, Beck).

For some of the others, I just don't understand from a musical talent perspective why they are held in such high esteem. In most of these latter cases, I typically attribute my lack of understanding to a shortcoming on my part (tin ear for some musical elements or not enough time spent earnestly listening to the performer's collection of songs, and not necessarily a clear shortcoming of the performer.

I also want to add Animal Collective to the list. They're not experimental enough to be innovative and not talented enough to write good songs.

Even though she's not a band, I have to also say Joanna Newsom. Oh, so the indie kids think it was lame when the 70s prog rock excess was singing about fairies, but now all of a sudden it's amazing when the same material is shrieked by a girl that plays the harp? She's the worst of the worst in terms of being overrated right now.

Joanna Newsom rules! When i get back from school i tell you guys why i love her! If you think that Newsom is all about fairytales and playing a harp, you're not listening to the same girl...

I really have to disagree with this. Maybe they aren't the absolute farthest avant-garde group out there, but they manage to incorporate a wide variety of sounds into songs with some very catchy melodies. As for "good songs" I don't know what qualifies as "good" to you, but the most obvious example of a quality AC song would be "My Girls":

I don't mean to seem like I
Care about material things,
Like a social status,
I just want
Four walls and adobe slats
For my girls

In my view, they're just solid all around and really realized their potential with Merriweather Post Pavillion.

This is the first AC song that really struck a chord with me. Those lyrics hit me where I live, given that I have three daughters and frequently struggle with the balance between, on the one hand, providing them with both necessities and happiness and, on the other hand, teaching them not to be materialistic.

For Animal Collective, I recognize they have written some nice songs - My Girls, Peacebone, Leaf House, Grass. The problem for me is that they average around one memorable song per album. The rest of their stuff certainly has some experimental elements, but the sound just comes off as too repetitive for me. For that reason, I just don't understand the hype.

Joanna Newsom, on the other hand, is just silly. Sorry people, not going to sway me on that one.

Joanna's gift for melody (in the tradition of the great composers of the 19th century, not in the typical pop hook way that most people think of when they say "melody") is unlimited. Sure her voice hurts the ears sometimes, but her compositional skills are phenomenal. You could probably write a 30 page thesis for a doctorate in music on the way she constructs her songs.

For some people, music is just about having fun. I dig that. I love putting on music to dance to or sing in the car. But I also enjoy something complex and challenging, and that's what Joanna presents to me. Often times artists ask a lot from their audience, and I feel like if you put the effort into those artists, the rewards tend to be great, as their work tends to bet the most enriching.

I'll echo Tom Waits. He's a talented guy but I don't get the universal acclaim for such a niche artist. I think his persona he creates works much better on screen than on an album.

Joanna Newsom... she's unique. After the boom of Paula Coles and Natalie Merchants during the 90s, the singer/songwriters circuit became a caricature of itself. Fiona Apple managed to scape out of this, but there were times during the decade that Vanessa Carlton and Michelle Branch were the best of the bunch! Until 2004. When Joanna Newsom arrived as a unique talent, that kept the eye in the past without sound like a copy and kept an eye in a future. First of all she played a unique and complicated instrument, that many see it as old and angelical, the harp. She had a unique sense of melody and she managed to create the most varied feelings without the help of any other instrument aside her harp or the piano. Newsom was also naive, even when speaking of sex. She kinda showed us the good side of living, even during pain. Second of all: the voice. Nothing like you've heard before, even laughable at first, but then it kinda hits you, it goes deep. it's the perfect instrument to express what she's saying, what she feels. The best part was always her lyrics. Her use of words, her sense of humor, the emotions, she knew hot to fully express herself using archaic english. Her lyrical images were not as simply as the melodies or the subjects she was speaking about, but everything was in its right place. She broke the generic, tired mode that everyone was following. She was unique, a breath of fresh air, different and then, even people started calling her an elf and placing her among the freak folk movement and its leader Devendra Banhart. At some point she belong there, but she wasn't Devendra.

So the question before Ys was released was "What to expect of Joanna Newsom's second album?" A girl who has one of the most unique voice of indie music? She was destined to fail, to do the same thing, over and over again without its initial charms. And any thought of failing was gone by the end of 2006. Ys had arrived. Ys is the sophomore album that shatters the highest of expectations. It came out of nowhere. Again, laughable: a painting as a cover, looks kinda old and even Rolling Stone didn't waste their times, only giving it 2 stars and a 5 line review with unfavorable comparisons to Kelly Clarkson. Ys received raves. Ys was much more than a leap forward it was THE leap forward since Radiohead stopped being the Creeps to join the Street Spirit that we all learn to love. Ys was different in every level. Brainy, complicated, long, very long, ambitious in structure and in producers and helpers (Albini, Parks, Newsom).But there was one thing about Ys that surpassed all of this. It was as unique as Newsom herself. It was an album that came out of nowhere. No one was expecting Newsom to release not only one of 2006 best releases, but a decade defining album that defies time itself. It belonged to the 00s, it was the right time and the right hour. The worst thing about overlooking Ys is calling it a fairytale. To me, Ys is like Arcade Fire's Funeral one of the few albums of the 00s that actually sound human. Newsom depicted love, pain, trust, sadness, death. Cosmia about the death of her best friend, Emily about her sister and family, Sawdust and Monkey and Only Skin were about relationships. There was no one like Newsom. She used the words, the melodies, she never lost momentum, she changed song structures, she was breaking the rules, the mold, she was being her unique, she was being unique! There's no album that sounds like Ys, and there's no one like Newsom. She build a group of her own. Ys had lyrical image connected to water: rivers, seas, ocean. Ys was a city destroyed by the sea. Newsom was in pieces, she was destroyed, it was a rough time. Fairytale? She was being human. Hating Joanna Newsom for that is like hating Metallica for doing electropop (they never did). Do you really think that "Monkey & Bear" is about a Bear? You need to dig deeper.

I had no expectations for Have One On Me. When i heard it was a triple album, i thought of suicide. After listening to '81, i thought she was going backwards… i was so wrong. Have One On Me is a leap forward, a consolidation of everything Joanna did so far. Her perfect mix of not following the pop structures (chorus and all the rest) and an ear for a good melody, while you can see the growth of the arrangements , her lyrics expanded: she could be direct and crypt, sometimes during the same song, her voice become more controlled, while still totally expressing herself and not loosing the character. Newsom made one of the most cohesive records i've heard and it was a triple album for god's sake. It got to a point when even the weakest (in comparison) tracks were important to the album and is like Newsom said: she doesn't write long songs, she feels they need to have the duration they have. When it's short, is short, when it's long, is long. The album and its song, feel like a full cycle, something is complete. Like during the end of Cosmia, when Newsom is almost having a breakdown and doing noises and you can hear a sound of something out of this world, closing the album. Like the end of Does Not Suffice, when it looks like someone wants Newsom away of everything, like she's gone, and there's only the piano and the instrumentation and the noise and then silence... the room is empty

Putting myself in a music critic's place. After listening to so many crap, that sound like so many other stuff already made. An artist like Newsom is a relieve, a true cheer to listen to. Another thing that is adorable about Newsom is her person. She's not the pretentious little brat people say she is. She's simple, she likes collecting records, her garden, small things and her small hometown. She loves the earth, the country. She's educated, shy, funny, sympathetic, grounded. She knows how to answers questions, she accepts comparisons and is even flattered by them. She's like Bjork, she came from a different land, full of different ways of life, but she's cool people. Newsom has an incredible sense of humor and is instantly likable. that's why -aside the amazing music- she pulls off a hell of a live show. She always give credit to her band, she is always cracking jokes, doing covers no one expects her to do (kid rock and sheryl crow anyone?), having a good time, singing her tracks and earning raves. Do you really think they guy from SNL would date her if she was a weirdo pixie came from the woods?

There's no one else like Newsom and it'll never be. She's unique. You can compare her to Joni Mitchell and Kate Bush, but they're not Newsom and vice and versa. Newsom is very careful with her art and how it needs to be transmuted to us, she's a perfectionist and she delivers. Her work takes time to fully grown and show all its charms, but when they do, there's no feeling like this. Best singer/songwriter of the 00s, hands down! You might no like her, hate her actually, but don't say you don't get the hype, is pretty easy… she's like uniqueness in person. Something new in such a recycled era. She was a precious talent to watch back in 2004 and she's a talent to look forward now. When it comes to Joanna Newsom, people always say she needs "another" album to prove something. She's at album number 3 (a triple of that). She doesn't have to prove anything, she already did, she already fulfilled her promise and all the rest: made a terrific first record, delivered a masterpiece, a terrific third record, aside a great touring EP. She will do bad songs, might even make bad albums and all that, but for now… she's perfect to me. Also sorry if i sounded rude, not my intention at all, i just had to speak about this

Having been classically trained myself, it's not her "challenging" nature or music that bother me. I just find her lyrics trite and vocals irritating, and these impede any enjoyment I can derive from her music.

And her music IS nice sometimes. I will say, though, that her music is fairly elementary compared to the works of 19th century classical composers. I just wouldn't go there with this one.

Also, I hope you weren't implying that just because I don't like Joanna Newsom, I only like music that is fun and that I like to dance to. That would be a little condescending, don't you think? For better or worse, I put quite a bit of effort into understanding music.

sure, but >indie kids/70s proggies< (apologies, but that's an "equal" for me) basically love it the other way round..

ps: "The One Band Who's Hype" reads like the title of a brazenly terrific catch phrase poem

Point conceded, but it only solidifies why I don't get it.

It only solidifies that you've actually got it, but hate it anyway... and that's the most of all jadesome moves... because i get those people who don't get it... and their neutron spill outs are IMMENSE... too bad that i'm still doin' solitary field hockeying on Robert Smith vs Paul Westerberg territories..

btw, i'm surprised no one hasn't mentioned The Arcade Fire so far, they're definitely the freshest analogy to the AM. Night Shyamalania bash fest..

I would have added The Arcade Fire, but I thought I was already pushing too many buttons with Animal Collective and Joanna Newsom, so I cut my losses.

I have a weird relationship with the Arcade Fire. I loved them for 3 years, hated them for 2, and now I love them again. I still don't think they quite walk on water like some people do, but they're still a top 20 band of my lifetime.

I would like to add the Arcade Fire. I listened to Funeral a few years back, thought it had some good moments but it wouldn't make my top 10 of the year. I like Wake Up and Rebellion (Lies) and they seem to be the two most popular songs from it. I don't connect with the music though. Fans and critics talk about this emotional release they get when they listen to AF, and I don't get that reaction (which in turn makes me like them even less). Man, critiquing a supposedly pompous band makes me feel pretty pompous. Oh, and they're a little too theatrical for my taste too.

At least you like Pixies and Sonic Youth...they both influenced Pavement, but I don't get the ripping off part. Pavement wound up returning the favor influenced Sonic Youth. Are you an Experimental, JetSet, Trash and No Star fan?

well it would be like Sonic Youth sounding like vintage Sonic Youth. What I don't like is how some bands can get away with being loved and admired by critics and fans for reminding them of certain other bands that inspired them while other particularly my favorite bands get so much distain for sounding like the bands who influenced them. Every time I have a new favorite band or artist some critics acuse them of knocking off others. But you have bands who are influencial themselves who sound similar to bands that never get their credit for also being influencial . Yes we've all heard the MBV comparisons to influencial bands like the Velvet Underground, Sonic Youth and Jesus and Mary Chain but their biggest influence by far is the Cocteau Twins who critics were never too found of so they don't get the credit they deserve. Why is it ok for Pavement to get away with being influenced by Sonic Youth when all you hear is negative press about how the second Camera Obscura album sounds like Belle and Sebastian? The lead singers are a different gender but if the songs do sound similar to B&S than they would be the best songs B&S have ever written because the songs on that album are flawless no matter who may have had influence on them. That happened when I started liking Tori Amos and her frequent comparisons to Kate Bush. I don't know why bands get praised while others get panned for sounding like other bands but if it's great music and on the level of the band that influenced them it's not such a band thing. Where would Facebook be without Myspace?:-)I'm sure there's still a bunch of nerds that are hellbent on defining the difference between the two but it's all the same and yet the Facebook movie is being called as "groundbreaking" and "cutting edge" as the site claims to be.

Pavement basically took the SY formula and made it more about pop hooks than guitar lines.

I don't see the whole argument...All 3 are incredibly important, and I love them all. All are among the top 20 american rock bands of all time imo.

Because two out of the 3 are magnificant and influencial while one is riding their coat tails which would be fine if there were any good and by that I mean had a vocalist that actually sang (even scream in Black Francis' case, at least there's emotion behind it all) and didn't sound like he was falling asleep while "singing." I guess that was the slacker thing but I have to hear some emotion behind the music. That's what kind of killed Exile in Guyville for me. "BABY I'M TIRED!!!!!!!!!!!!....." and than she turns into Stephen Malkmus..."of fighting." I know she was being a storyteller but at least sing the line don't just drain all the passion away from it like you're the female Malkus.

Also I don't get Neutral Milk Hotel. Elephant 6 has a couple of perfectly cheerful, fun and playful acts including the band that started the label Apples in Stereo but the critcs are so self loathing of course they go for the band that has the self esteem issues. If Elephant 6 were truly a family like the Kennedys Neutral Milk Hotel would be stowed away in the basement especially since their songs sound like they were made in the basement which is what people loved because in indie music under produced ALWAYS one ups OVERPRODUCED no matter how awful the band is. Not that NMH is Pavement aweful just incredibly over hyped since there's so many better neo psyche bands including bands on their own record label. But Dressy Bessy sounds just like the Breeders so of course they can't be any good ;-)

Exile In Guyville is the album that made me understand women. Everything about that album screams classic. And Strange Loop is one of THE greatest album closers ever. Phair's delivery was always during the whole album was flawless. "Whip-Smart" deserve it better, it was a terrific mid-decade indie rock album. Whitechocolatespaceegg was good and everything, but i won't deny the overproduction in some of the tracks (Ride, Money) was kinda of a step backwards. It worked with "What Makes You Happy" and the title track and many of the tracks are great, it is an awesome record, but it could've been much better. I think "Whip-Smart" is much more tighter as a record, though i still see Guyville as miles ahead of the bunch.

"I always wanted you, i only wanted more than i knew"

honest, raw and straight from the gut, that was Guyville, few albums achieve such a feat.

pretty much is her only notable album. Huge critical acclaim, but none of her others have come remotely close to touching it. So I wouldn't say there's a lot of hype around Phair as one of the greatest artists of our time- but, she did craft one of the greatest albums.

Whipsmart the actual title track is Liz Phair's finest moment. It was lofi but she actually sang on that song and it just sounds like the ultimate lofi anthem. I do hear a difference between "pop" Liz Phair(2000s) and indie Liz. Still I don't get why people called her follow up and third a dissapointment. I actually like spaceegg better than anything PJ Harvey's ever written. To me Guyville is about as good as Is This Desire? and I think Harvey might have been the reason critics gave up on Phair. Like Phair she was angry but you can acutually hear that in her music. Guyville's lofi production kept it all at the same tone even though like Sinead O' Conner you can hear all the emotion in the lyrics and sometimes when Phair attemps to sing. O'Connor always brought out emotion in her vocals even though she hasn't been in her prime in 20 years. So I feel critics and her hipster nerd following either wanted something angrier like Harvey or Exile Part 2 which I'm glad she didn't make. She moved on and grew up. She wanted her songs well produced. It's not like she put up a wall of sound production. Besides Loveless costs the band their entire career and people say it's the album of the 90s and the Arcade Fire has a big sound so it's kind of hypacritical to expect on thing out of one artist while another acclaimed band can get away with throwing in the kitchen sink. In fact the only thing that has dissappointed me about Phair is she didn't go further in pop and make such a huge sell out that people will actually appreciate her self titled record. I'm talking Katy Perry, vocoder drenched, hiphop collaborations with Solder Boy type of selling out. THAT'S HOW YOU SELLOUT!!!!! Name the album Exile in Guyville Part 2 and have her holding a PITCHFORK on the cover. That would be the biggest "screw you" in indie rock history. Phair does have the balls to do something like that. I would be so much funnier than any Jauquin Phoenix mockumentary.